• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

"Brightness" defined ? (1 Viewer)

L

Lost Arra

Well-known member
If your binoculars are primarily used in dark wooded areas with heavy canopy frequently at dawn or dusk is there a reason why you would not want the brightest make/model possible?

The Zeiss Fl T model is frequently referred to as "bright" or "brightest" or close to the top of some bright category. Are these particularly good binos for the woods?

If not, is "Bright" not always a desirable trait? Maybe in full sunshine?

I do realize that other characteristics like warm or cool colors or ergonomics could affect the decision but in this case I'm asking when is "bright" not good?

In my case I like an open hinge design like the swaro which I'm guessing does not give up much in low light capability to the Zeiss.
 
Lost Arra said:
If your binoculars are primarily used in dark wooded areas with heavy canopy frequently at dawn or dusk is there a reason why you would not want the brightest make/model possible?

The Zeiss Fl T model is frequently referred to as "bright" or "brightest" or close to the top of some bright category. Are these particularly good binos for the woods?

If not, is "Bright" not always a desirable trait? Maybe in full sunshine?

I do realize that other characteristics like warm or cool colors or ergonomics could affect the decision but in this case I'm asking when is "bright" not good?

In my case I like an open hinge design like the swaro which I'm guessing does not give up much in low light capability to the Zeiss.
Click to expand...
The 8X32 FL is not "brighter" than other roofs.
 
It probably depends on your eyes. I went round and round with the 8x32 FL and the 8x32 SV, and with 50+ year-old eyes (how vague and vain is that!!) I could barely tell any difference in terms of brightness. Yes, the FL is a bit brighter to me, but a 42mm was brighter still, so it's a wash.

For me at any rate, brightness between the two is not relevant. And in regular daylight conditions the increased color and contrast of the SV leaves the FL behind. The FL is really showing its age, even though I still like it and probably will keep it regardless. It sits in the desk at the office for lunchtime sauntering.

Greater Yellowlegs and Blue-winged Teal today. Nice. Of course I mostly used the Nikon ED 50 for that. :t:

Mark
 
FWIT I found some differences in how dark or light the shadows appeared with some binoculars.

A Kowa Genesis 8x33 made for slightly "brighter" shadows than the Nikon EII 8x30 and Swaro EL 8x32 SV amd therefore showed some more detail.

But the differences also were miniscule and only added up to the whole package of optical and wrgonomical performance.
 
Lost Arra,
It seems like an all-good thing to me for a binocular to have a high light transmission. The good coatings and glass that lead to this also lead to cleaner, better contrasted images. Of course if the scene is very bright, you might wish for lower transmission, but that is would be going backwards in my opinion--just put on sunglasses if you need to.

Don't forget though, that in the low light settings that you describe, the appearance of maximum brightness requires not only a high transmission percentage, it also requires that the exit pupil of the binocular be at least as large as the pupils of your eyes. Many users including myself find that 4mm exit pupils start to fade noticeably in low light, while 5mm is pretty good. Bigger than that may or may not seem brighter, depending on the particulars of the conditions and your eyes.

Ron
 
Brightness should also include the size of the exit pupil of the binoculars. Those 8x32 that are premium alphas could be bested by a 7x42 mid priced model with an exit pupil of 6. If it is dark enough in the woods, you eyes' pupil will expand to take in more light.

That some binoculars work so well that your eyes have to block the light by squeezing down the pupil is a factor to consider. It makes me want to have several binoculars available. Someday, it would be reasonable to have subtle filters to increase the enjoyment of the binoculars you have in hand.
Rob.
 
Dear all,
I followd the discussion about brightness. If you look into textbooks on light science the definition of brightness has two components.
-1- the light intensity incident on a certain surface (number of photons per square mm for example). This is a quantity that can be measured.
-2- the translation of our visual system of a light signal into bright and not so bright. That has to do with the intensity of the light signal, see 1, and the color balance of the light signal. Some colors are defined as bright by our visual system others are not.
So brightness does not have a quantitative unit to measure it since it is an experience of the visual system.
Gijs
 
If you want brightness, then you really should try out the Zeiss HT 8x42. It comfortably out-brights FL and handles beautifully.

Try one.

Lee
 
Lee,
I agree with your conclusion about the Victory HT. I have investigated the 8x42HT and I have made a full test report (in Dutch). The HT is compared with the Victory 8x42 and 7x42 FL, with the Swarovski SLC-HD 8x42 and with the Leica Utravid HD 8x42. The report will be available soon on a WEB-site, I will mention it when it is put there.
Gijs
 
Today I was looking over the Straits of Gibraltar towards the Morrocco coast and with the Zeiss HT 10x42 I could see raptors on the southern side that I could not see with my scope on 20x.The view through the scope appeared dull in comparison with the HT´s.I am talking 15 to 16 KM distant.This is all about brightness,brightness and brightness.To hand hold a 10x42 and see more than a scope on 20x is phenomenal. Anyone want to buy a brand new scope????....Eddy.
 
eddy the eagle said:
Today I was looking over the Straits of Gibraltar towards the Morrocco coast and with the Zeiss HT 10x42 I could see raptors on the southern side that I could not see with my scope on 20x.The view through the scope appeared dull in comparison with the HT´s.I am talking 15 to 16 KM distant.This is all about brightness,brightness and brightness.To hand hold a 10x42 and see more than a scope on 20x is phenomenal. Anyone want to buy a brand new scope????....Eddy.
Click to expand...

Eddy:

What scope was that? In daylight, a capable 20X will beat 10X, everytime.
Tell us more.

Jerry
 
Jerry, I was using my Zeiss 85mm Diascope,it was not that I couldn´t see the birds with the scope it is the fact that I could identify them better with the binoculars as the image was clearly brighter and sharper.I know this sounds strange but it is true......Eddy
 
Gijs van Ginkel said:
Lee,
I agree with your conclusion about the Victory HT. I have investigated the 8x42HT and I have made a full test report (in Dutch). The HT is compared with the Victory 8x42 and 7x42 FL, with the Swarovski SLC-HD 8x42 and with the Leica Utravid HD 8x42. The report will be available soon on a WEB-site, I will mention it when it is put there.
Gijs
Click to expand...

Thanks Gijs, look forward to hearing about it.

Lee
 
eddy the eagle said:
Jerry, I was using my Zeiss 85mm Diascope,it was not that I couldn´t see the birds with the scope it is the fact that I could identify them better with the binoculars as the image was clearly brighter and sharper.I know this sounds strange but it is true......Eddy
Click to expand...

Hi Eddy

This is an interesting observation. Was the day hazy? Sometimes higher mag can just make a scene more hazy. I am wondering if the HT was 'cutting' through haze better than the scope.

Lee
 
I recently tried a few binoculars at a RSPB reserve shop. I was comparing my Opticron SRGA 8x32 with all that I could lay my hands on. Viewing a bright sunlit fence with feeders nearby, the view through my binoculars was just fine. I tried a Ziess conquest 8x42 (they didn't have an 8x32 for me to try). I was surprised how much brighter an already bright scene became. A light coloured part of the fence was uncomfortable to look at through the Ziess.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 11 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

C
My search for pocket binoculars; the case for the Maven 7x28.
Replies
1
Views
2K
iseegeorgesstar
I
O
Brightness of 8x32 vs 10x42
2 3
Replies
40
Views
7K
dries1
dries1
P
Subjective, non-analytical comparison of three 832 Premiums.
2
Replies
22
Views
3K
Paultricounty
P
mgp13
Zeiss SFL 8x40 review from Australia
Replies
7
Views
3K
GrampaTom
G
F
The way to MY binocular
2
Replies
29
Views
5K
bartd
B

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top